Reefer2 wrote:Disagree, they are professionals and he should of burried one or 2,

Haha. It's a physical limitation, doesn't matter if Dan Hamhuis is being paid to play hockey (ie. "he's a professional") he's not being paid to play his off hand to give the Canucks a better PP option.

i can see a couple being missed with the bad ice and the puck bouncing but Hamhuis is not an offensive D man so putting him out there is the first place was a mistake. having a forward there would of been a better option.

Yeah like I said, someone else (who shoots right) would have been a better option on those plays.

It's frustrating watching Hamhuis on the powerplay but like I said, at least the guy adds some movement. We weren't generating much of anything from the point anyways..

Overall a pretty good effort by the Canucks...but this team won't be competitive again until the offensive problems are solved. The offense won't be fixed until the PP is fixed, and to fix the PP the only idea I have left is different personnel because the coaches have tried nearly every damn combination possible with disappointing results.

Garrison is too stationary on the PP...he literally just stands there. Edler is clearly rusty. Kesler's desire to shoot lots results in too many good possessions resulting in weak chances. The PP has no movement at all. The defenders manage to keep us to the outside because we don't get them running around at all. The point shot is never open because the high defender is never forced down low.

Hamhuis missing on those three or four chances on our first PP was comical really, but if we score a goal or two there the end result is likely different.

I thought the PP last night had better movement than I'd seen all year, much of it though was set to open up Hamhuis on the back door and he wasn't able to deal with the bouncing pucks.

Garrison pisses me off. I recall reading last year where he described getting pucks in his wheelhouse for his boomer shot. The problem I have is that unless the pass is perfect, he won't shoot. Often a chance for a quick wrist/snap shot is lost.

Also noticed Daniel shooting more and with a bit more snap.

But that was the bright side to a fairly mediocre effort. Again, as in Edmonton, by the time of the third period, the Canucks looked more prepared to be reading bedtime stories to their kids than playing hockey.

I'd like to see Burrows taken off the PP, with Higgins or Kassian in his place.

Garrison often takes too long to shoot as well. He'll get the puck, delay, look up, delay and by the time he decides to shoot the defender has gotten close enough to either cause a turnover or disrupt the shot.

The Canucks are playing, and getting results, at a level most of us predicted at the start of the year. Every now and then they have flashes of looking pretty good which raises expectations, and hope. They are so far removed from that 2011 team. They blew a great chance to move within 2 of the Kings. Somehow this season would feel better if we could be one of the top three in our division. Just because so many said we wouldn't do it I guess. Although I still want a cup!!

It was great to see Stanton back. What a great find he was and his future looks bright.

Luongo with another solid game.

Other than that a disappointing result.

A couple of games off until our next game and here is hoping we come out with a more consistent 60 minute effort and a new look PP!

Meds wrote:One more reason not to take RD seriously.....he just listed 3 second round picks as being 1st round failures by Gillis.

Keep it up asshat.

More classic examples of Meds piss poor reading comprehension, nice work Einstein. Don't stray to far from your Edler angst bra... You've carved out a nice little niche there, when you do stray, you look like, what did you say? An asshat? LMAO

"I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Are you listening? - Plastics." - The Graduate